Lydiard Imitations

rekrunner wrote:

Lydiard made specificity fashionable at a time when the rest of the world was interval training."

This is a crazy comment, like gypsy talking about repetition training - not interval training - but calling it interval training. Then later he admits not knowing the definition of interval training vs metabolism training.

Anyway, how could Lydiard make specificity fashionable, when interval training was already almost everything specificity??? That doesn't make sense. Maybe Lydiard invented the sun and the moon???

Kim Stevenson wrote:

John worked out what and how he would do his Hill training ... Specific to the environment he lived in, with the athletes he trained with. He may have gone up to Auckland at various times to check in with Arthur .. But the bulk of his work was in Tokoroa .. I will be "Cheeky" here and say .. this could be applying the Principle of "Individualisation" of Training ...

Te,He,He,He .. Anyone want a copy of an "Original" ... "Run to the Top" .. 50 years old .. this year .. email me I have a copy available .. Great the old man is still causing "Controversy" ....

That is very generous of you to offer a copy of the book. I do have a photocopy of it here, and went through the schedules several times many years ago.

It sounds to me that John Davies was adaptable and applied the training individually, for himself and for others. Good for him.

That is not to say that Lydiard was adaptable. He was not. I met Lydiard and talked with him on occasion. He was a very rigid man, not flexible, not adaptable. He was not the same as John Davies.

Wetcoast wrote:

Kim,

I emailed you. I will take it. Remember you sold me the Run with Lydiard book about 6 years ago or so?

Ok looks like Antonio has suckered in some more people. 3000 Lydiard-basing posts later and he is still has no life.

Hey Antonio,

Here are some basics for you. Should help you to understand. Have the whine after reading:

http://athleticsillustrated.com/editorial/lydiard-basics/

Oh no...Very original indeed. One more piece/article of Lydiard propaganda and Lydiardism advertising ! See the next episodes, Lydiardism in pijama, Lydiardism on the Kitching , Lydiardism music, Lydiardism movies, etc. etc.

Thanks but i don´t buy that one. Do you think that i waist my time with read silly thinks, out of any interest, out of my interest that is the modern training methodology, and that in fact is nothing but Lydiard propaganda ?

I´m informed about Lydiard absolutely since the day that tghe very next day after your exigence that i couldn´t comment on Lydiard on one interview, you said that my training is similar to Lydiard. From that day on i´m aware what is your face of Lydiardism, your Lydiardism version.

I confess. I open this site address but when i read the name of the authour i gave up. This article can´t be nothing but one more object of Lydiard propaganda, of Lydiard cult, done by one non-independent Lydiardist journalist addicted to Lydiard that was afraid that i talk about Lydiard when he interview me. Very democratic !

After that your original and quite intelligent conclusion that i´m very similar to Lydiard, i gave up to read anything from you. You aren´t competent to write about training and i don´t want to waist my time with silly writing.

Without read i´m quite sure it´s made by one addicted Lydiardist, that interview other Lydiardists, and the conclusion is that on Lydiard everything is good, quite perfect, the world best training and every famous coach, every runner you interview is a Lydiardist. Even Antonio is a Lydiardist.

Wet. You miss one inn my interview. Read it once again. I name Peter Snell, in of the best if not the best Lydiard runner representative. That was a subliminal prove that i´m a Lydiardist. You miss that one.

You must subtitle all your interviews and articles with this sentence "From a Lydiardist, with the Lydiardist lobby, and to be read by Lydiardists".

Bye Bye ! Live longer to advertise about Lydiardism.

The individual - as they are many on this board - that can´t distinguish the meaning or can´t define if one kind of training stimulus is aerobic or anaerobic, that can´t distinguish that anaerobic training or speed pace is not the same than specifics, or that says such ignorant things out of any factual prove or evidence, that is what Gypsy was been saying, that individual isn´t competent at all to debate about distance run physiology, training methodology or athletics.

LetsRun.com shall open one on-line school with athletic disciplines to teach some of you about training !

The individual - as they are many on this board - that can´t distinguish the meaning or can´t define if one kind of training stimulus is aerobic or anaerobic, that can´t distinguish that anaerobic training or speed pace is not the same than specifics, or that says such ignorant things out of any factual prove or evidence, that is what Gypsy was been saying, that individual isn´t competent at all to debate about distance run physiology, training methodology or athletics.

LetsRun.com shall open one on-line school with athletic disciplines to teach some of you about training !

Hi rekrunner:

Would you mind giving a range of paces for, say a 1:44 guy like Snell, in that workout example of 3/4 effort repetitions of 800 meters? And in your understanding did Lydiard make a distinction between repetitions and intervals? When you wrote above, in part, "And I'm not so sure that any kind of interval training would ever be done at 3/4 effort" does that mean that there is no such Lydiard workout as 3/4 effort repetitions of 800 meters? Thanks.

You cannot handle the fact that you do not understand the Lydiard method, therefore do not appreciate it.

It is the most effective method, better than anything you have come up with, by far.

Your childish ranting is not changing anyone`s mind, live with it.

Wetcoast wrote:

You cannot handle the fact that you do not understand the Lydiard method, therefore do not appreciate it.

It is the most effective method, better than anything you have come up with, by far.

Your childish ranting is not changing anyone`s mind, live with it.

Rene Descartes: 'I think therefore I am'

Wetcoast version: "I run therefore I am Lydiardist".

You must be proud to interview me, a childish character. Your interviews are just made with serious and adult people.

Also you must be proud you got the chance that once in a lifetime you did interview one non-Lydiadist.

Or, since you say i´m a Lydiadist you go to the Guiness book of records while you are “the only human being that got the world record to interview Lydiardists straight.

Wetcoast wrote:

You cannot handle the fact that you do not understand the Lydiard method, therefore do not appreciate it. .... It is the most effective method, better than anything you have come up with, by far. .... Your childish ranting is not changing anyone`s mind, live with it.

Christopher,

You are clearly an intelligent person but your comment above explains why Antonio gets so worked up about Lydiard followers.

It appears that Lydiard supporters fall into one of three camps .....

* Intelligent balanced individuals (like Kim S.) who seek to explain, enlighten & provide rare insight

* Propogandists .... "it is the most effective method" ... i.e. assertion rather than evidence-based argument

* The delusional (like Gypsy) who claim that athlete X, Y or Z followed a Lydiard programme when they most clearly did not

It's possible to have a reasoned, sensible debate with the former ... but not the latter 2.

J.R. wrote:

rekrunner wrote:

Lydiard made specificity fashionable at a time when the rest of the world was interval training."

This is a crazy comment, like gypsy talking about repetition training - not interval training - but calling it interval training. Then later he admits not knowing the definition of interval training vs metabolism training.

Anyway, how could Lydiard make specificity fashionable, when interval training was already almost everything specificity??? That doesn't make sense. Maybe Lydiard invented the sun and the moon???

Rekrunner clearly understands "specificity" much better than you.

Lydiard's co-ordination runs (this is what rek was talking about) were highly specific in that they were near to race distance at or very near to race pace ... how "specific" do you want it to get?

Interval training @ that time (early 60s) was typically at much shorter distances than race distance (rek was using Halberg a 5K runner as his example) & at much faster pace ... not specific at all!! ... intervals were in the main used to develop anaerobic power ... not terribly significant (or specific) for 5K/10K runners.

Funny, once again your analysis can be applied directly to yourself. You are very perceptive, just looking in the wrong direction. Stand in front of the mirror and you will find the right direction.

Let me get this right Antonio. Lydiard didn't do no training individualisation at all. This is amazing. Even with these three individuals you can evidence from, it is amazing. I had never considered it this way. To think that Arthur's program was so perfect that the exact same program worked for three different individuals. And not just worked, but Olympic medals, the hardest thing to achieve in our sport. If you say Arthur never individualised for anyone, then this is even more amazing. His program was the same for everyone yet everyone improved, world records were made, and many Olympic medals gained, all from the one un-individualised program.

One sec ..... i just had to take my pedestal of Arthur Lydiard and push it a little bit higher.

Renato Canova wrote:

I invite Gypsy to look at the results of Dubai Marathon, particularly what Lydia Cheromei is able to do in the field of ladies. Because I burn the athletes in very short time with the intensity, everybody can see, on 27th Jan, how can run an athlete that won medals in World Junior Championships... 20 YEARS AGO !

This is not exactly the singular example you might want to use, but i understand you don't have any others.

Once again i say you are an expert coach and Lydia is an example of your work, where an athletes career is resurrected, at longer distances, after the original distances cannot be improved on any more. To resurrect someones career after such a period of time is difficult usually and you should be applauded for this effort and her results last year in Dubai. Also good luck with your prediction for next week, Lydia must have done some good sessions recently.

But this is not an example of someone developed beyond 4 years at their original distances. This isnt the best profile.

5000 Metres

2000 14:47.35 Sydney 25/09/2000

1997 14:46.72 Berlin 26/08/1997

1996 15:49.85 Atlanta, GA 26/07/1996

1995 14:53.44 Berlin 01/09/1995

We don't know the problems from 2000 and onwards through that period of no competition (2000-2004) and then the period of poor competition (2005-2011). Injury? Sickness? Home problems?

Still we come back to the same point, where it appears there is a lack of longer term continuity in your athletes improvement. Apart from everything you are reading in this thread there is one thing i haven't mentioned that may say something.

EXTENSIVE>INTENSIVE is only part of the process

the larger process actually is EXPANSIVE>EXTENSIVE>INTENSIVE

All the problems seem to occur when the expansive isn't being paid attention to anymore.

I must have offended you somehow i guess. But i am interested in which athletes these letters X Y and Z represent.

Then you say this:

Glad to see i'm not your only target. If what you say is true it is very interesting. It would show that race pace specificity has been a valuable introduction to the methodological pantheon. (Somehow it got its own religion though :s)

rekrunner wrote:Lydiard made specificity fashionable at a time when the rest of the world was interval training."

J.R. wrote:

This is a crazy comment, like gypsy talking about repetition training - not interval training - but calling it interval training. Then later he admits not knowing the definition of interval training vs metabolism training.

Anyway, how could Lydiard make specificity fashionable, when interval training was already almost everything specificity??? That doesn't make sense. Maybe Lydiard invented the sun and the moon???

Part of Lydiard may have been part of the sun and moon at some point in the last few eons...

As jackanory said already - however i feel Holmer was operating on a whole other level than Gerschler in terms of specificity of indivisualisation.

So if this statement by rekrunner is actually quite a brilliant observation does that then invalidate your claims about me?

Seriously though i understand this high modulation alternating intensity training well enough and lets just say we do repetition of intervals - so we include both words so nobody feels left out and we are actually decriptively correct. Better?

ps whats metabolism training again? I forgot what i connected it to in my own thinking, sorry. ;)

See...I´m not like you either that instead of prove by teh source, the man himself or tehir runners that Renato is engaged on drugs, you use other vague generalized source "the italians are corrupt" to doubt or to conclude that Renato uses drugs.

When i need to know something, my first source is to investigate from the source, in thsi case Lydiard own training and not from freak sources, Lydiard revisionists, Lydiard speculation, or Lydiardists. One ting i did learn long ago when Nobby did discuss on the internet with Jpohn Molvar about what is and how is Lydiard training. 2 experts and they bot disagree what´s Lydiard training in every single asopec. I´ve learn that each one Lydiardist got a his own Lydiard version.

I take my conclusion from 3 individuals that erte directed coached by Lydiard the man, what can be more trustfull, as well as the Lydiard the man, that after say so many things he misses the individual need. He also wrote in Lydiard books, and repeted many times that the marathon aerobic block might be the same for everybody. Do you need more evidence that he doesn´t care about trainng individualisation that the aerobic block might be the same for everybody ?

But you take from how many that Italia is a corrupt country and that we can´t trust on italians about drug ?

You take from where and from how many that the portuguese did Lydiard training ? From one individual Lopes, and from one sentence that i wrote myself that i got a total different meaning to what you attribute.

Your usual verbiage.

and pray to the one !

You have got to be kidding, right?

Look at the original post and tell me you are kidding.

Without this one man wrecking crew bent on bashing Lydiard there would be no 57 page threads. There would be no so-called, "Lydiardists". There would be no insults.

This, like many other threads is supposed to be about discussing Lydiard.

The man clearly has nothing going on at home.

And to tell me that it is comments like mine that cause this. Holy cow. Listen, you haven't seen the other multi-page threads on Lydiard. There are many, all with the very same recurring theme: A lonely, attention seeking man in Europe with no life, getting his attention by bashing others.

This is a bloody joke.

gypsy wrote:

Part of Lydiard may have been part of the sun and moon at some point in the last few eons...

As jackanory said already - however i feel Holmer was operating on a whole other level than Gerschler in terms of specificity of indivisualisation.

Well see there, joke or not, Lydiard people think he invented the sun and the moon.

Did Lydiard invent Gosta Holmer too, who came before Lydiard?? Maybe he also invented Gersler, and Paavo Nurmi.

Jackanory, here I thought you were a more reasoned person, and now you show to be as nuts as the rest of the Lydiard delusional people! I will show you a comparison.

Lydiard's coordination period in entirely, contains maybe 6x 880 one day, a 6 mile time trial another (for 10,000m runners, do you want to give more examples for a week? Total it up. How many miles do you get? I went through the Lydiard schedules several times on my own, so I know.

Bob Schul's Igloi training was 12 miles EVERY DAY all year round, not just a few weeks, that was almost 100% RACE SPECIFIC. In fact I ran with the SMTC a few times and all the interval training they did was not sprints, as you think (knowing nothing about it), but was right at race pace or very close to race pace.

But you know nothing about these other methods, not even Gershler. And so you spout nonsense about them. That is the same that Lydiard did.

Wetcoast wrote:

You have got to be kidding, right?

Look at the original post and tell me you are kidding.

Without this one man wrecking crew bent on bashing Lydiard there would be no 57 page threads. There would be no so-called, "Lydiardists". There would be no insults.

This, like many other threads is supposed to be about discussing Lydiard.

The man clearly has nothing going on at home.

And to tell me that it is comments like mine that cause this. Holy cow. Listen, you haven't seen the other multi-page threads on Lydiard. There are many, all with the very same recurring theme: A lonely, attention seeking man in Europe with no life, getting his attention by bashing others.

This is a bloody joke.

Wetcoast

Issues like “aerobic first is a stupidity” is serious training debate as well as Lydiard rich debate, if don´t, I guess that the world famous coaches of world top class runners would not contribute to the debate.

And you did start that issue among many ? I did.

If you feel uncomfortable you might give up to post. If the matter doesn´t concern your interest about Lydiard or I if I write things that you prefer not to read, don´t read and don´t comment.

After all your problem is that this thread is not at your wish. This thread and namely my posts aren´t not the Lydiard apology that your interviews are. There, on your interviews, ther´s no debate at all, just a Lydiardists that just agree with Lydiard, why they don´t ?

Long before my posts on this thread you wanted to shoot out everyone that stands about to comment on Lydiard without Lydiard agreement. You did try to do the same with John Hadd (posted as O) you tried to do the same with Renato Canova when he did posts to HRE, you try to do the same when you have no more argument out of that one that you feel uncomfortable with the post contain of anyone that doesn´t say "Amen" to the Lydiard training.

I guess that your role model of Lydiard debate is done on the Forum of the Lydiard Foundation or on your interviews. Total totally unanimity and agreement there. I wouldn´t post on the Forum of the Lydiard Foundation never. Because I don´t read post where I don´t accept the rule of obedience. But you if you think about me or this thread what you say ther´s not a single reason to continue to post. But what is strange, or didn´t, is that you still do, you do post once for a while, not as many I do because you have no argue of debate as I do. If you read and post it´s because ther´s something – even just one reason of detail – that your wish makes you post, because I guess that no one posts without want.

Ps – me in another mood. See, i got no live at home, my problem at home is that my wife and son both are Lydiardists.